What have we learned from our audience feedback?

To answer this question i will film a variety of people- male/female/different ages, some relevant questions in order to gain some feedback which i will then evaluate.

The questions i will ask regarding the two TV adverts are:
-Did you understand the narrative?
- What genre is this advert and how can you tell?
-Would this advert appeal to you, if no would do you think it would appeal to?
- How do you think we could improve it?
- What was your favourite advert and why?

The questions i will ask regarding the sponsorship advert are:
- As sponsorship adverts are very short do you think we were able to create humour in this time?
- Did we use the correct conventions for a sponsorship advert?
- Did we use the correct mis en scene
- Does this appeal to you?
-How do you think we could improve it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmuEisRXf00         

This above is the link to the interview, two of the candidates spoke about both adverts at the same time and weren't interviewed regarding the sponsorship, whilst the other two girls did 3 separate interviews so i will able to gain feedback from the two adverts and sponsorship.

From gathering this feedback from a variety of audience members i have leaned that their are strong and weak parts to our project. Many of the answers given were similar, however i got some useful feedback in terms of improvements.

Although our target audience was mainstreamers, after interviewing people it is apparent that our toothpaste advert is more appealing to female young adults, and this was conveyed by the clothes that Kate is wearing at the end which present her as neither a teenager or a middle aged woman but a woman in early twenties. However, we interviewed one male and he focused more on the toothpaste and the fact that he wears glasses to connect to the advert, the fact that we used a female didn't phase him. Another candidate did mention how at the start of this advert Kate looks very young, she could pass for a teenager, which then changes  at the end when she looks much older, again the clothes that she is wearing create the change in her age. I agree with this comment slightly, she does look younger at the start but that's because at the end she has done her hair and makeup as you would if you were going to work. The clothes she wears at the start contribute to the mis en scene and is all part of creating her character, whilst at the end she is dressed more smartly to go to work, the outfit isn't too formal as we imagined her occupation to be a primary school teacher.



Start of the advert













End of the advert





All our candidates shared the same view that the narrative for this advert was very easy to follow, the storyline was basic and due to this they found it more funny, obviously if they didn't understand or couldn't follow what was happening they wouldn't find it as funny. It was clear to them all that the genre we used was comedy, leaving the house with toothpaste on your teeth and getting naked in front of people grieving is all unrealistic, but the embarassment for that individual is what causes the humour, also someone said how the reaction of the grieving people made them laugh.

Improvements:
One of the comments was that the end shot could have been a little bit closer when showing her teeth, i think we used a relativley close shot of the punchline, and we film this for a couple of seconds so the audience don't miss it. We wanted to still have her whole head in frame which you can see from the picture above her hat is right at the top, so going any closer i think could make it look unprofessional.
Another comment was that we could have used a backing song, however i disagree with this as i think not only does it create realism using only digetic sound but creates more humour as all the focus is on the main character and her actions, we did use the bird song to indicate it is the morning and as a group we thought this was all the non digetic sound we would need. Also we used Specsaver adverts as our template and conducted research into them, they also only use digetic sound and i think this is more effective when working with comedy.

Life drawing:
The answers from the last question clearly state that the toothpaste advert was more popular. I think this is because it more straight forward, and easier to watch whereas the life drawing was slightly long winded (having the receptionist) however despite this the receptionist was a compulsory part of the narrative, as previously explained it was unclear what Kona was doing without filming the receptionist  A comment from someone that we didnt film said that something didnt seem right when the receptionist was talking to the model, it had something to do with their positioning. After watching it back more carefully we realised that we had crossed the 180 degree rule, this was a huge help in terms of feedback as this is such as important technique that we leant about last year and is the difference between unprofessional and professional work. Luckily through iMovie we were easily able to flip the shot, we thought we would have to film again but through the use of the technology this wasnt nesissary.

Sponsorship advert:
The sponsorship advert has proven to be the weakest out of the three adverts, although slightly comedic, it was said to be slightly boring and not fast and snappy as a sponsorship should be.
The main element that let us down was that there was already milk in the bowl when we show Kona pouring the milk.




We realised when we were editing that we didnt have a shot where the bowl had just the cereal (dog food) in and no milk, due to previously filming her pouring the milk in. We thought it didnt look that obvious but because the camera angle forces the audience to look directly at the bowl you can clearly see that we have made an error.



Another comment that was made regarding the sponsorship advert was that it lacks humour due to the fact you know straight away what the punchline is. This is at the start of the advert and you can clearly see that it is dog food and not cereal, the punchline for the other two adverts was delayed and revealed at the end which created the humour. I agree with this comment, it would have been more effective if the dog food sign wasnt in focus, if it had been a bit blurry or further away, but the fact that you see it straight away ruins the advert slightly, Konas reaction adds to the comedy at the end however.

We used the correct conventions for a sponsorship, the voice over and the titles that come at the end created the realism and make it obvious that it wasnt the same as our other two adverts. One of the comments was that it should have been short sharp and snappy and we didnt do this. I agree with this slightly as its a bit basic, the camera angles and the movement are all very simple, its not fast paste, i dont think it would catch the audiences eye if they were flicking through channels. We also could of had some pictures hanging in the background to make it look more homely, this also would have created some character which is what we did in the toothpaste advert (the establishing shot at the start).

Web pop-up:
We put our web pop-up on Facebook so that our friends could comment and give us feedback on it.
The questions we asked were:
1. Rate it from 1-5 on realism
2.What attracts your attention the most?
3.Did we create humour?
4.Who do you think this would appeal to? (age, gender ect)
5. How could we improve it?
















This is a screenshot of the comments from Facebook


From the feedback i have learned that  we maybe should have thought about a different background colour, we thought having a plain background would mean more focus on the main points (the banana and offer) but then the comments show that it would have been more eye catching to have a bold colour.
The wittiness of the words with the picture had a positive impact and created humour which is what we intended, as it goes with the theme of all our adverts.